BackgroundThe prognostic value of body composition in cancer patients has been widely studied during the last decade. The main finding of these studies is that sarcopenia, or skeletal muscle depletion, assessed by CT imaging correlates with a reduced overall survival (OS). By contrast, the prognostic value of fat mass remains ill-defined. This study aims to analyze the influence of body composition including both muscle mass and adipose tissue on OS in a homogeneous population of advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) patients.MethodsAmong 235 patients with chemorefractory advanced CRC included in the SoMore and RegARd-C trials, body composition was assessed in 217 patients on baseline CT images. The relationship between body composition (sarcopenia, muscle density, subcutaneous and visceral fat index and density), body mass index (BMI) and OS were evaluated.ResultsPatients with a higher BMI had a better OS (≥30 versus < 30, HR: 0.50; 0.33–0.76). Those with low muscle index and muscle density had an increased mortality (HR: 2.06; 1.45–2.93 and HR: 1.54; 1.09–2.18, respectively). Likewise, low subcutaneous and visceral fat index were associated with an increased risk of dying (HR: 1.63; 1.23–2.17 and 1.48; 1.09–2.02 respectively), as were a high subcutaneous and visceral adipose tissue density (HR: 1.93; 1.44–2.57 and 2.40; 1.79–3.20 respectively). In multivariate analysis, a high visceral fat density was the main predictor of poor survival.ConclusionsOur results confirm the protective role of obesity in CRC patients at an advanced stage, as well as the negative prognostic impact of muscle depletion on survival. More importantly, our data show for the first time that visceral adipose tissue density is an important prognostic factor in metastatic CRC.Trial registrationNCT01290926, 07/02/2011 and NCT01929616, 28/08/2013.
Background: There is a high unmet clinical need for treatments of advanced/metastatic biliary tract cancers after progression on first-line chemotherapy. Regorafenib has demonstrated efficacy in some gastrointestinal tumors that progress on standard therapies. Patients and methods: REACHIN was a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized phase II study designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of regorafenib in patients with nonresectable/metastatic biliary tract cancer that progressed after gemcitabine/platinum chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned 1 : 1 to best supportive care plus either regorafenib 160 mg once daily 3 weeks on/1 week off or placebo until progression or unacceptable toxicity. No crossover was allowed. The primary objective was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary objectives were response rate, overall survival, and translational analysis. Results: Sixty-six patients with intrahepatic (n ¼ 42), perihilar (n ¼ 6), or extrahepatic (n ¼ 9) cholangiocarcinoma, or gallbladder carcinoma (n ¼ 9) were randomized, 33 to each treatment group (33 per group). At a median follow-up of 24 months, all patients had progressed and six patients were alive. Median treatment duration was 11.0 weeks [95% confidence interval (CI): 6.0e15.9] in the regorafenib group and 6.3 weeks (95% CI: 3.9e7.0) in the placebo group (P ¼ 0.002). Fourteen of 33 patients (42%) in the regorafenib group had a dose reduction. Stable disease rates were 74% (95% CI: 59e90) in the regorafenib group and 34% with placebo (95% CI: 18e51; P ¼ 0.002). Median PFS in the regorafenib group was 3.0 months (95% CI: 2.3e4.9) and 1.5 months (95% CI: 1.2e2.0) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0.49; 95% CI: 0.29e0.81; P ¼ 0.004) and median overall survival was 5.3 months (95% CI: 2.7e10.5) and 5.1 months (95% CI: 3.0e6.4), respectively (P ¼ 0.28). There were no unexpected/new safety signals. Conclusion:Regorafenib significantly improved PFS and tumor control in patients with previously treated metastatic/ unresectable biliary tract cancer in the second-or third-line setting. Clinical Trial Registration: The trial is registered in the European Clinical Trials Register database (EudraCT 2012-005626-30) and at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02162914).
While adjuvant chemotherapy is an established treatment for pathological stage II and especially stage III colon cancer, its role in the multimodal management of rectal cancer remains controversial. As a result, there is substantial variation in the use of this treatment in clinical practice. Even among centres and physicians who consider adjuvant chemotherapy as a standard treatment, notable heterogeneity exists with regard to patient selection criteria and chemotherapy regimens. The controversy around this topic is confirmed by the lack of full consensus among national and international clinical guidelines. While most of the clinical trials do not support the contention that adjuvant chemotherapy may improve survival outcomes if pre-operative (chemo)radiotherapy is also given, these suffer from many limitations that preclude drawing definitive conclusions. Nevertheless, in the era of evidence-based medicine, physicians should be guided by the available data and refrain from extrapolating results of adjuvant colon cancer trials to inform treatment decisions for rectal cancer. Patients should be informed of the evidence gap, be given the opportunity to carefully discuss pros and cons of all the possible management options and be empowered in the decision making. In this article we review the available evidence on adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer and propose a risk-adapted decisional algorithm that largely relies on informed patient preferences.
BackgroundTumoral heterogeneity is a major determinant of resistance in solid tumors. FDG-PET/CT can identify early during chemotherapy non-responsive lesions within the whole body tumor load. This prospective multicentric proof-of-concept study explores intra-individual metabolic response (mR) heterogeneity as a treatment efficacy biomarker in chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).MethodsStandardized FDG-PET/CT was performed at baseline and after the first cycle of combined sorafenib (600mg/day for 21 days, then 800mg/day) and capecitabine (1700 mg/m²/day administered D1-14 every 21 days). MR assessment was categorized according to the proportion of metabolically non-responding (non-mR) lesions (stable FDG uptake with SUVmax decrease <15%) among all measurable lesions.ResultsNinety-two patients were included. The median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 8.2 months (95% CI: 6.8–10.5) and 4.2 months (95% CI: 3.4–4.8) respectively. In the 79 assessable patients, early PET-CT showed no metabolically refractory lesion in 47%, a heterogeneous mR with at least one non-mR lesion in 32%, and a consistent non-mR or early disease progression in 21%. On exploratory analysis, patients without any non-mR lesion showed a significantly longer PFS (HR 0.34; 95% CI: 0.21–0.56, P-value <0.001) and OS (HR 0.58; 95% CI: 0.36–0.92, P-value 0.02) compared to the other patients. The proportion of non-mR lesions within the tumor load did not impact PFS/OS.ConclusionThe presence of at least one metabolically refractory lesion is associated with a poorer outcome in advanced mCRC patients treated with combined sorafenib-capecitabine. Early detection of treatment-induced mR heterogeneity may represent an important predictive efficacy biomarker in mCRC.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01290926
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.